Human-in-the-Loop AI

Existing approaches to monitoring AI agents rely on supervised evaluation: human-written rules or LLM-based judges that check for known failure modes. However, novel misbehaviors may fall outside predefined categories entirely and LLM-based judges can be unreliable. To address this, we formulate unsupervised monitoring, drawing an analogy to unsupervised learning. Rather than checking for specific misbehaviors, an unsupervised monitor assists humans in discovering problematic agent behaviors without prior assumptions about what counts as problematic, leaving that determination to the human. We observe that problematic behaviors are often distinctive: a model exploiting a benchmark loophole exhibits actions absent from well-behaved baselines, and a vulnerability unique to one evaluation manifests as behavioral anomalies when the same model runs across multiple benchmarks. This motivates using group-wise behavioral differences as the primary signal for unsupervised monitoring. We introduce Hodoscope, a tool that operationalizes this insight. Hodoscope compares behavior distributions across groups and highlights distinctive and potentially suspicious action patterns for human review. Using Hodoscope, we discover a previously unknown vulnerability in the Commit0 benchmark (unsquashed git history allowing ground-truth recovery, inflating scores for at least five models) and independently recover known exploits on ImpossibleBench and SWE-bench. Quantitative evaluation estimates that our method reduces review effort by 6-23$\times$ compared to naive uniform sampling. Finally, we show that behavior descriptions discovered through Hodoscope could improve the detection accuracy of LLM-based judges, demonstrating a path from unsupervised to supervised monitoring.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) pipelines have become integral to modern research, supporting fields such as Medical Sciences, Agriculture, and Social Sciences, and enabling large-scale data analysis, predictive modeling, and the automation of complex tasks. However, designing and implementing AI solutions remains challenging for many researchers due to the expertise required in the design and development of end-to-end AI systems. To address this gap, we present Domain-Driven Adaptable AI Pipelines (DDAP), a controlled, human-in-the-loop, agentic framework that leverages large language models to guide users in a systematic construction of AI pipelines and their corresponding implementation code. DDAP structures the development process into four stages: problem definition, compute environment specification, pipeline generation, and code generation. Through this staged interaction, the framework adapts to domain context, user expertise, and resource constraints, while maintaining user control over key decisions. We evaluate DDAP across multiple datasets spanning business, biology, and health science domains by comparing its AI models against expert-developed models. The experimental results show that DDAP achieves competitive results in several tasks compared to expert baselines, although performance varies across problem types, particularly for text-based clustering tasks. By combining guided interaction, adaptability, and reproducibility, DDAP demonstrates that a controlled agentic framework can generate competitive AI pipelines for non-expert users.

The use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in high-risk, decision-making scenarios presents technical, safety, and normative challenges; problems that may only be ameliorated by human oversight. However, notions of human oversight lack a common foundational understanding: oversight architectures are not well defined, the roles involved remain unclear, and implementation steps are opaque. Hence, researchers and practitioners struggle to determine how to design, implement, and evaluate systems that enable effective human oversight. This paper advances a practical framework for effective human oversight of AI systems, based on a cross-disciplinary perspective that draws on insights from computer science, human-computer interaction, psychology, philosophy, and law. The core contributions are: (1) a foundational framework, with a working definition, architecture and processes for effective human oversight of AI systems; (2) an initial template for documenting oversight architectures and processes, applied to diverse domains; and (3) a synthesis of open research challenges that need to be considered in the emerging field of effective human oversight of AI systems.

Engineering workflows such as design optimization, simulation-based diagnosis, control tuning, and model-based systems engineering (MBSE) are iterative, constraint-driven, and shaped by prior decisions. Yet many AI methods still treat these activities as isolated tasks rather than as parts of a broader workflow. This paper presents Agentic Engineering Intelligence (AEI), an industrial vision framework that models engineering workflows as constrained, history-aware sequential decision processes in which AI agents support engineer-supervised interventions over engineering toolchains. AEI links an offline phase for engineering data processing and workflow-memory construction with an online phase for workflow-state estimation, retrieval, and decision support. A control-theoretic interpretation is also possible, in which engineering objectives act as reference signals, agents act as workflow controllers, and toolchains provide feedback for intervention selection. Representative automotive use cases in suspension design, reinforcement learning tuning, multimodal engineering knowledge reuse, aerodynamic exploration, and MBSE show how diverse workflows can be expressed within a common formulation. Overall, the paper positions engineering AI as a problem of process-level intelligence and outlines a practical roadmap for future empirical validation in industrial settings.

Gait analysis is essential in post-stroke rehabilitation but remains time-intensive and cognitively demanding, especially when clinicians must integrate gait videos and motion-capture data into structured reports. We present OGA-AID, a clinician-in-the-loop multi-agent large language model system for multimodal report drafting. The system coordinates 3 specialized agents to synthesize patient movement recordings, kinematic trajectories, and clinical profiles into structured assessments. Evaluated with expert physiotherapists on real patient data, OGA-AID consistently outperforms single-pass multimodal baselines with low error. In clinician-in-the-loop settings, brief expert preliminary notes further reduce error compared to reference assessments. Our findings demonstrate the feasibility of multimodal agentic systems for structured clinical gait assessment and highlight the complementary relationship between AI-assisted analysis and human clinical judgment in rehabilitation workflows.

This paper presents a closed-loop system for software lifecycle management framed as a control architecture rather than a code-generation tool. The system manages a backlog of approximately 1,602 rows across seven task families, ingests 13 structured source documents, and executes a deterministic seven-stage pipeline implemented as seven scheduled automation lanes. The automation stack comprises approximately 12,661 lines of Python across 23 scripts plus 6,907 lines of versioned prompt specifications, with checkpoint-based time budgets, 101 exception handlers, and 12 centralized lock mechanisms implemented through four core functions and eight reusable patterns. A Jira Status Contract provides externally observable collision locking, and a degraded-mode protocol supports continued local operation when Jira is unavailable. Artificial-intelligence assistance is bounded by structured context packages, configured resource caps, output re-validation, and human review gates. A formal evaluation of the initial 152-run window yielded 100% terminal-state success with a 95% Clopper-Pearson interval of [97.6%, 100%]; the system has since accumulated more than 795 run artifacts in continuous operation. Three rounds of adversarial code review identified 51 findings, all closed within the study scope (48 fully remediated, 3 closed with deferred hardening), with zero false negatives within the injected set. In an autonomous security ticket family of 10 items, six were completed through pipeline-autonomous dispatch and verification, two required manual remediation, and two were closed by policy decision. The results indicate that bounded, traceable lifecycle automation is practical when autonomy is embedded within explicit control, recovery, and audit mechanisms.

Objective: To describe the architecture and design rationale of meta-pipe, an open-source large language model (LLM)-agent pipeline that integrates the complete systematic review and meta-analysis (SR/MA) workflow -- from literature search through statistical analysis, manuscript generation, and quality assurance -- with mandatory human oversight at critical decision points. Study Design and Setting: We developed a 10-stage modular pipeline integrating Claude (Anthropic; Opus 4 for reasoning, Haiku 3.5 for classification) for LLM-assisted screening and extraction, Python (~3,600 lines of code) for automation, R (meta, metafor, gemtc, netmeta) for statistical analysis, and Quarto for manuscript rendering. Five mandatory human decision points enforce oversight. We systematically compared meta-pipe's capabilities with five existing SR automation tools based on published documentation as of March 2026. Results: meta-pipe offers four capabilities not available in any single existing tool: automated manuscript generation from analysis outputs, semi-automated GRADE assessment, overclaim detection (12 predefined patterns), and dual-paradigm network meta-analysis (Bayesian and frequentist). Estimated API cost is $15-30 per typical 5-10 study review. No validation data are reported; this is a system description, not a validation study. Conclusion: End-to-end AI-assisted evidence synthesis is architecturally feasible as an open-source tool with mandatory human oversight. Formal validation reproducing published Cochrane reviews is underway and essential before routine use.

We present CODE-GEN, a human-in-the-Loop, retrieval-augmented generation (RAG)-based agentic AI system for generating context-aligned multiple-choice questions to develop student code reasoning and comprehension abilities. CODE-GEN employs an agentic AI architecture in which a Generator agent produces multiple-choice coding comprehension questions aligned with course-specific learning objectives, while a Validator agent independently assesses content quality across seven pedagogical dimensions. Both agents are augmented with specialized tools that enhance computational accuracy and verify code outputs. To evaluate the effectiveness of CODE-GEN, we conducted an evaluation study involving six human subject-matter experts (SMEs) who judged 288 AI-generated questions. The SMEs produced a total of 2,016 human-AI rating pairs, indicating agreement or disagreement with the assessments of Validator, along with 131 instances of qualitative feedback. Analyses of SME judgments show strong system performance, with human-validated success rates ranging from 79.9% to 98.6% across the seven pedagogical dimensions. The analysis of qualitative feedback reveals that CODE-GEN achieves high reliability on dimensions well suited to computational verification and explicit criteria matching, including question clarity, code validity, concept alignment, and correct answer validity. In contrast, human expertise remains essential for dimensions requiring deeper instructional judgment, such as designing pedagogically meaningful distractors and providing high-quality feedback that reinforces understanding. These findings inform the strategic allocation of human and AI effort in AI-assisted educational content generation.

Outage management in large-scale cloud operations remains heavily manual, requiring rapid triage, cross-team coordination, and experience-driven decisions under partial observability. We present ActionNex, a production-grade agentic system that supports end-to-end outage assistance, including real-time updates, knowledge distillation, and role- and stage-conditioned next-best action recommendations. ActionNex ingests multimodal operational signals (e.g., outage content, telemetry, and human communications) and compresses them into critical events that represent meaningful state transitions. It couples this perception layer with a hierarchical memory subsystem: long-term Key-Condition-Action (KCA) knowledge distilled from playbooks and historical executions, episodic memory of prior outages, and working memory of the live context. A reasoning agent aligns current critical events to preconditions, retrieves relevant memories, and generates actionable recommendations; executed human actions serve as an implicit feedback signal to enable continual self-evolution in a human-agent hybrid system. We evaluate ActionNex on eight real Azure outages (8M tokens, 4,000 critical events) using two complementary ground-truth action sets, achieving 71.4% precision and 52.8-54.8% recall. The system has been piloted in production and has received positive early feedback.

Deep learning models excel at detecting anomaly patterns in normal data. However, they do not provide a direct solution for anomaly classification and scalability across diverse control systems, frequently failing to distinguish genuine faults from nuisance faults caused by noise or the control system's large transient response. Consequently, because algorithmic fault validation remains unscalable, full Verification and Validation (V&V) operations are still managed by Human-in-the-Loop (HITL) analysis, resulting in an unsustainable manual workload. To automate this essential oversight, we propose Agent-Integrated Verification and Validation (AIVV), a hybrid framework that deploys Large Language Models (LLMs) as a deliberative outer loop. Because rigorous system verification strictly depends on accurate validation, AIVV escalates mathematically flagged anomalies to a role-specialized LLM council. The council agents perform collaborative validation by semantically validating nuisance and true failures based on natural-language (NL) requirements to secure a high-fidelity system-verification baseline. Building on this foundation, the council then performs system verification by assessing post-fault responses against NL operational tolerances, ultimately generating actionable V&V artifacts, such as gain-tuning proposals. Experiments on a time-series simulator for Unmanned Underwater Vehicles (UUVs) demonstrate that AIVV successfully digitizes the HITL V&V process, overcoming the limitations of rule-based fault classification and offering a scalable blueprint for LLM-mediated oversight in time-series data domains.

Existing visual trackers mainly operate in a non-interactive, fire-and-forget manner, making them impractical for real-world scenarios that require human-in-the-loop adaptation. To overcome this limitation, we introduce Interactive Tracking, a new paradigm that allows users to guide the tracker at any time using natural language commands. To support research in this direction, we make three main contributions. First, we present InteractTrack, the first large-scale benchmark for interactive tracking, containing 150 videos with dense bounding box annotations and timestamped language instructions. Second, we propose a comprehensive evaluation protocol and evaluate 25 representative trackers, showing that state-of-the-art methods fail in interactive scenarios; strong performance on conventional benchmarks does not transfer. Third, we introduce Interactive Memory-Augmented Tracking (IMAT), a new baseline that employs a dynamic memory mechanism to learn from user feedback and update tracking behavior accordingly. Our benchmark, protocol, and baseline establish a foundation for developing more intelligent, adaptive, and collaborative tracking systems, bridging the gap between automated perception and human guidance. The full benchmark, tracking results, and analysis are available at https://github.com/NorahGreen/InteractTrack.git.

Vietnamese Speech Emotion Recognition (SER) remains challenging due to ambiguous acoustic patterns and the lack of reliable annotated data, especially in real-world conditions where emotional boundaries are not clearly separable. To address this problem, this paper proposes a human-machine collaborative framework that integrates human knowledge into the learning process rather than relying solely on data-driven models. The proposed framework is centered around LLM-based reasoning, where acoustic feature-based models are used to provide auxiliary signals such as confidence and feature-level evidence. A confidence-based routing mechanism is introduced to distinguish between easy and ambiguous samples, allowing uncertain cases to be delegated to LLMs for deeper reasoning guided by structured rules derived from human annotation behavior. In addition, an iterative refinement strategy is employed to continuously improve system performance through error analysis and rule updates. Experiments are conducted on a Vietnamese speech dataset of 2,764 samples across three emotion classes (calm, angry, panic), with high inter-annotator agreement (Fleiss Kappa = 0.8574), ensuring reliable ground truth. The proposed method achieves strong performance, reaching up to 86.59% accuracy and Macro F1 around 0.85-0.86, demonstrating its effectiveness in handling ambiguous and hard-to-classify cases. Overall, this work highlights the importance of combining data-driven models with human reasoning, providing a robust and model-agnostic approach for speech emotion recognition in low-resource settings.

Scientific discovery is slowed by fragmented literature that requires excessive human effort to gather, analyze, and understand. AI tools, including autonomous summarization and question answering, have been developed to aid in understanding scientific literature. However, these tools lack the structured, multi-step approach necessary for extracting deep insights from scientific literature. Large Language Models (LLMs) offer new possibilities for literature analysis, but remain unreliable due to hallucinations and incomplete extraction. We introduce Elhuyar, a multi-agent, human-in-the-loop system that integrates LLMs, structured AI, and human scientists to extract, analyze, and iteratively refine insights from scientific literature. The framework distributes tasks among specialized agents for filtering papers, extracting data, fitting models, and summarizing findings, with human oversight ensuring reliability. The system generates structured reports with extracted data, visualizations, model equations, and text summaries, enabling deeper inquiry through iterative refinement. Deployed in materials science, it analyzed literature on tungsten under helium-ion irradiation, showing experimentally correlated exponential helium bubble growth with irradiation dose and temperature, offering insight for plasma-facing materials (PFMs) in fusion reactors. This demonstrates how AI-assisted literature review can uncover scientific patterns and accelerate discovery.

Learning to defer (L2D) enables human-AI cooperation by deciding when an AI system should act autonomously or defer to a human expert. Existing L2D methods, however, assume static human performance, contradicting well-established findings on fatigue-induced degradation. We propose Fatigue-Aware Learning to Defer via Constrained Optimisation (FALCON), which explicitly models workload-varying human performance using psychologically grounded fatigue curves. FALCON formulates L2D as a Constrained Markov Decision Process (CMDP) whose state includes both task features and cumulative human workload, and optimises accuracy under human-AI cooperation budgets via PPO-Lagrangian training. We further introduce FA-L2D, a benchmark that systematically varies fatigue dynamics from near-static to rapidly degrading regimes. Experiments across multiple datasets show that FALCON consistently outperforms state-of-the-art L2D methods across coverage levels, generalises zero-shot to unseen experts with different fatigue patterns, and demonstrates the advantage of adaptive human-AI collaboration over AI-only or human-only decision-making when coverage lies strictly between 0 and 1.

Presentations are a primary medium for scholarly communication, yet most AI slide generators optimize the artifact (a visually plausible deck) while under-optimizing the delivery process (pacing, narrative, and presentation preparation). We present DeepSlide, a human-in-the-loop multi-agent system that supports preparing the full presentation process, from requirement elicitation and time-budgeted narrative planning, to evidence-grounded slide--script generation, attention augmentation, and rehearsal support. DeepSlide integrates (i) a controllable logical-chain planner with per-node time budgets, (ii) a lightweight content-tree retriever for grounding, (iii) Markov-style sequential rendering with style inheritance, and (iv) sandboxed execution with minimal repair to ensure renderability. We further introduce a dual-scoreboard benchmark that cleanly separates static artifact quality from dynamic delivery excellence. Across 20 domains and diverse audience profiles, DeepSlide matches strong baselines on artifact quality while consistently achieving larger gains on delivery metrics, improving narrative flow, pacing precision, and slide--script synergy with clearer attention guidance.

Building on existing approaches, we revisit Human-in-the-Loop Object Retrieval, a task that consists of iteratively retrieving images containing objects of a class-of-interest, specified by a user-provided query. Starting from a large unlabeled image collection, the aim is to rapidly identify diverse instances of an object category relying solely on the initial query and the user's Relevance Feedback, with no prior labels. The retrieval process is formulated as a binary classification task, where the system continuously learns to distinguish between relevant and non-relevant images to the query, through iterative user interaction. This interaction is guided by an Active Learning loop: at each iteration, the system selects informative samples for user annotation, thereby refining the retrieval performance. This task is particularly challenging in multi-object datasets, where the object of interest may occupy only a small region of the image within a complex, cluttered scene. Unlike object-centered settings where global descriptors often suffice, multi-object images require more adapted, localized descriptors. In this work, we formulate and revisit the Human-in-the-Loop Object Retrieval task by leveraging pre-trained ViT representations, and addressing key design questions, including which object instances to consider in an image, what form the annotations should take, how Active Selection should be applied, and which representation strategies best capture the object's features. We compare several representation strategies across multi-object datasets highlighting trade-offs between capturing the global context and focusing on fine-grained local object details. Our results offer practical insights for the design of effective interactive retrieval pipelines based on Active Learning for object class retrieval.

Scanning transmission electron microscopy (STEM) has become a cornerstone instrument for semiconductor materials metrology, enabling nanoscale analysis of complex multilayer structures that define device performance. Developing effective metrology workflows for such systems requires balancing automation with flexibility; rigid pipelines are brittle to sample variability, while purely manual approaches are slow and subjective. Here, we present a tunable human-AI-assisted workflow framework that enables modular and adaptive analysis of STEM images for device characterization. As an illustrative example, we demonstrate a workflow for automated layer thickness and interface roughness quantification in multilayer thin films. The system integrates gradient-based peak detection with interactive correction modules, allowing human input at the design stage while maintaining fully automated execution across samples. Implemented as a web-based interface, it processes TEM/EMD files directly, applies noise reduction and interface tracking algorithms, and outputs statistical roughness and thickness metrics with nanometer precision. This architecture exemplifies a general approach toward adaptive, reusable metrology workflows - bridging human insight and machine precision for scalable, standardized analysis in semiconductor manufacturing. The code is made available at https://github.com/utkarshp1161/thickness-mapping-webapp

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly embedded in computer science education through AI-assisted programming tools, yet such workflows often exhibit objective drift, in which locally plausible outputs diverge from stated task specifications. Existing instructional responses frequently emphasize tool-specific prompting practices, limiting durability as AI platforms evolve. This paper adopts a human-centered stance, treating human-in-the-loop (HITL) control as a stable educational problem rather than a transitional step toward AI autonomy. Drawing on systems engineering and control-theoretic concepts, we frame objectives and world models as operational artifacts that students configure to stabilize AI-assisted work. We propose a pilot undergraduate CS laboratory curriculum that explicitly separates planning from execution and trains students to specify acceptance criteria and architectural constraints prior to code generation. In selected labs, the curriculum also introduces deliberate, concept-aligned drift to support diagnosis and recovery from specification violations. We report a sensitivity power analysis for a three-arm pilot design comparing unstructured AI use, structured planning, and structured planning with injected drift, establishing detectable effect sizes under realistic section-level constraints. The contribution is a theory-driven, methodologically explicit foundation for HITL pedagogy that renders control competencies teachable across evolving AI tools.

The accelerating displacement of human labor by artificial intelligence (AI) and robotic systems represents a structural transformation whose societal consequences extend far beyond conventional labor market analysis. This paper presents a systematic multi-domain examination of the likely effects on economic structure, psychological well-being, political stability, education, healthcare, and geopolitical order. We identify a critical and underexamined dimension of this transition: the governance gap between nominal human oversight of AI systems -- where humans occupy positions of formal authority over AI decisions -- and genuine human oversight, where those humans possess the cognitive access, technical capability, and institutional authority to meaningfully understand, evaluate, and override AI outputs. We argue that this distinction, largely absent from current governance frameworks including the EU AI Act and NIST AI Risk Management Framework 1.0, represents the primary architectural failure mode in deployed AI governance. The societal consequences of labor displacement intensify this problem by concentrating consequential AI decision-making among an increasingly narrow class of technical and capital actors. We propose five architectural requirements for genuine human oversight systems and characterize the governance window -- estimated at 10-15 years -- before current deployment trajectories risk path-dependent social, economic, and institutional lock-in.

Modern military operations expose soldiers to sustained psychological stress, leading to acute reactions, post-traumatic stress symptoms, and other mental health issues. Although the U.S. Department of Defense offers evidence-based therapies, access to trained professionals in forward-deployed and contested environments is limited. As a result, soldiers with early-stage distress are often evacuated to rear medical facilities, delaying care, reducing readiness, and increasing long-term risks. This paper proposes a Train-the-Trainers framework in which soldiers who have completed therapy and returned to duty are trained as peer facilitators to provide first-line psychological support in operational settings. To scale and standardize this model under severe resource and connectivity constraints, we introduce an agentic AI-enabled platform that augments these recovered soldiers with specialized AI agents. The recovered soldier acts as a human supervisor, coordinating agents for symptom triage, guided peer-support interventions, operational constraint reasoning, training and simulation, and structured documentation for clinical escalation when needed. The AI agents use consensus-driven decision support in high-stakes environments. The architecture functions in air-gapped and low-connectivity settings, maintaining human oversight and ethical safeguards. A functional prototype was developed with the McDonald U.S. Army Health Center, Newport News, VA, USA. By combining peer-based intervention with consensus-driven agentic AI decision support, the framework seeks to cut response times, prevent symptom escalation, reduce unnecessary evacuations, and improve continuity of care. This work shows how agentic AI can serve as a force multiplier for mental health support in austere environments and identifies pathways for broader evaluation and deployment across defense and humanitarian operations.

Providing timely and accurate learning support in large-scale online coding courses is challenging, particularly in resource-constrained contexts. We present Kwame 2.0, a bilingual (English-French) generative AI teaching assistant built using retrieval-augmented generation and deployed in a human-in-the-loop forum within SuaCode, an introductory mobile-based coding course for learners across Africa. Kwame 2.0 retrieves relevant course materials and generates context-aware responses while encouraging human oversight and community participation. We deployed the system in a 15-month longitudinal study spanning 15 cohorts with 3,717 enrollments across 35 African countries. Evaluation using community feedback and expert ratings shows that Kwame 2.0 provided high-quality and timely support, achieving high accuracy on curriculum-related questions, while human facilitators and peers effectively mitigated errors, particularly for administrative queries. Our findings demonstrate that human-in-the-loop generative AI systems can combine the scalability and speed of AI with the reliability of human support, offering an effective approach to learning assistance for underrepresented populations in resource-constrained settings at scale.

Q-matrices are a cornerstone of theory-driven assessment and learning analytics, making item demands and students' underlying knowledge components and misconceptions explicit and actionable. However, Q-matrices are typically crafted by experts, making them time-consuming to build, prone to subjectivity, and difficult to validate empirically. We propose a framework for human-AI Q-matrix refinement in which large language models (LLMs) generate candidate Q-matrices using structured, misconception-aware prompting, and NeuralCDM provides an empirical evaluation layer to compare candidates based on how well they explain student response data. We apply the framework to a thermodynamics assessment dataset and benchmark locally deployed LLMs against cloud-served models. Results show that iteratively refined LLM-generated Q-matrices can exceed expert-baseline model fit (AUC 0.780 vs. 0.717), and that locally deployed models achieve comparable performance to cloud APIs, supporting privacy-preserving deployment.

Rebuttal generation is a critical component of the peer review process for scientific papers, enabling authors to clarify misunderstandings, correct factual inaccuracies, and guide reviewers toward a more accurate evaluation. We observe that Large Language Models (LLMs) often struggle to perform targeted refutation and maintain accurate factual grounding when used directly for rebuttal generation, highlighting the need for structured reasoning and author intervention. To address this, in the paper, we introduce DEFEND an LLM based tool designed to explicitly execute the underlying reasoning process of automated rebuttal generation, while keeping the author-in-the-loop. As opposed to writing the rebuttals from scratch, the author needs to only drive the reasoning process with minimal intervention, leading an efficient approach with minimal effort and less cognitive load. We compare DEFEND against three other paradigms: (i) Direct rebuttal generation using LLM (DRG), (ii) Segment-wise rebuttal generation using LLM (SWRG), and (iii) Sequential approach (SA) of segment-wise rebuttal generation without author intervention. To enable finegrained evaluation, we extend the ReviewCritique dataset, creating review segmentation, deficiency, error type annotations, rebuttal-action labels, and mapping to gold rebuttal segments. Experimental results and a user study demonstrate that directly using LLMs perform poorly in factual correctness and targeted refutation. Segment-wise generation and the automated sequential approach with author-in-the-loop, substantially improve factual correctness and strength of refutation.

Interactive video segmentation often requires many user interventions for robust performance in challenging scenarios (e.g., occlusions, object separations, camouflage, etc.). Yet, even state-of-the-art models like SAM2 use corrections only for immediate fixes without learning from this feedback, leading to inefficient, repetitive user effort. To address this, we introduce Live Interactive Training (LIT), a novel framework for prompt-based visual systems where models also learn online from human corrections at inference time. Our primary instantiation, LIT-LoRA, implements this by continually updating a lightweight LoRA module on-the-fly. When a user provides a correction, this module is rapidly trained on that feedback, allowing the vision system to improve performance on subsequent frames of the same video. Leveraging the core principles of LIT, our LIT-LoRA implementation achieves an average 18-34% reduction in total corrections on challenging video segmentation benchmarks, with a negligible training overhead of ~0.5s per correction. We further demonstrate its generality by successfully adapting it to other segmentation models and extending it to CLIP-based fine-grained image classification. Our work highlights the promise of live adaptation to transform interactive tools and significantly reduce redundant human effort in complex visual tasks. Project: https://youngxinyu1802.github.io/projects/LIT/.

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in scientific writing but struggle with book-length tasks, often producing inconsistent structure and unreliable citations. We introduce CoAuthorAI, a human-in-the-loop writing system that combines retrieval-augmented generation, expert-designed hierarchical outlines, and automatic reference linking. The system allows experts to iteratively refine text at the sentence level, ensuring coherence and accuracy. In evaluations of 500 multi-domain literature review chapters, CoAuthorAI achieved a maximum soft-heading recall of 98%; in a human evaluation of 100 articles, the generated content reached a satisfaction rate of 82%. The book AI for Rock Dynamics generated with CoAuthorAI and Kexin Technology's LUFFA AI model has been published with Springer Nature. These results show that systematic human-AI collaboration can extend LLMs' capabilities from articles to full-length books, enabling faster and more reliable scientific publishing.

LLM-assisted modeling holds the potential to rapidly build executable Digital Twins of complex systems from only coarse descriptions and sensor data. However, resilience to LLM hallucination, human oversight, and real-time model adaptability remain challenging and often mutually conflicting requirements. We present three critical design principles for integrating resilience and oversight into such workflows, derived from insights gained through our work on FactoryFlow - an open-source LLM-assisted framework for building simulation-based Digital Twins of manufacturing systems. First, orthogonalize structural modeling and parameter fitting. Structural descriptions (components, interconnections) are LLM-translated from coarse natural language to an intermediate representation (IR) with human visualization and validation, which is algorithmically converted to the final model. Parameter inference, in contrast, operates continuously on sensor data streams with expert-tunable controls. Second, restrict the model IR to interconnections of parameterized, pre-validated library components rather than monolithic simulation code, enabling interpretability and error-resilience. Third, and most important, is to use a density-preserving IR. When IR descriptions expand dramatically from compact inputs hallucination errors accumulate proportionally. We present the case for Python as a density-preserving IR : loops express regularity compactly, classes capture hierarchy and composition, and the result remains highly readable while exploiting LLMs strong code generation capabilities. A key contribution is detailed characterization of LLM-induced errors across model descriptions of varying detail and complexity, revealing how IR choice critically impacts error rates. These insights provide actionable guidance for building resilient and transparent LLM-assisted simulation automation workflows.

Agentic artificial intelligence (AI) in organizations is a sequential decision problem constrained by reliability and oversight cost. When deterministic workflows are replaced by stochastic policies over actions and tool calls, the key question is not whether a next step appears plausible, but whether the resulting trajectory remains statistically supported, locally unambiguous, and economically governable. We develop a measure-theoretic Markov framework for this setting. The core quantities are state blind-spot mass B_n(tau), state-action blind mass B^SA_{pi,n}(tau), an entropy-based human-in-the-loop escalation gate, and an expected oversight-cost identity over the workflow visitation measure. We instantiate the framework on the Business Process Intelligence Challenge 2019 purchase-to-pay log (251,734 cases, 1,595,923 events, 42 distinct workflow actions) and construct a log-driven simulated agent from a chronological 80/20 split of the same process. The main empirical finding is that a large workflow can appear well supported at the state level while retaining substantial blind mass over next-step decisions: refining the operational state to include case context, economic magnitude, and actor class expands the state space from 42 to 668 and raises state-action blind mass from 0.0165 at tau=50 to 0.1253 at tau=1000. On the held-out split, m(s) = max_a pi-hat(a|s) tracks realized autonomous step accuracy within 3.4 percentage points on average. The same quantities that delimit statistically credible autonomy also determine expected oversight burden. The framework is demonstrated on a large-scale enterprise procurement workflow and is designed for direct application to engineering processes for which operational event logs are available.

During human motor skill training and physical rehabilitation, there is an inherent trade-off between task difficulty and user performance. Characterizing this trade-off is crucial for evaluating user performance, designing assist-as-needed (AAN) protocols, and assessing the efficacy of training protocols. In this study, we propose a novel human-in-the-loop (HiL) Pareto optimization approach to characterize the trade-off between task performance and the perceived challenge level of motor learning or rehabilitation tasks. We adapt Bayesian multi-criteria optimization to systematically and efficiently perform HiL Pareto characterizations. Our HiL optimization employs a hybrid model that measures performance with a quantitative metric, while the perceived challenge level is captured with a qualitative metric. We demonstrate the feasibility of the proposed HiL Pareto characterization through a user study. Furthermore, we present the utility of the framework through three use cases in the context of a manual skill training task with haptic feedback. First, we demonstrate how the characterized trade-off can be used to design a sample AAN training protocol for a motor learning task and to evaluate the group-level efficacy of the proposed AAN protocol relative to a baseline adaptive assistance protocol. Second, we demonstrate that individual-level comparisons of the trade-offs characterized before and after the training session enable fair evaluation of training progress under different assistance levels. This evaluation method is more general than standard performance evaluations, as it can provide insights even when users cannot perform the task without assistance. Third, we show that the characterized trade-offs also enable fair performance comparisons among different users, as they capture the best possible performance of each user under all feasible assistance levels.

Productive human-AI collaboration requires appropriate reliance, yet contemporary AI systems are often miscalibrated, exhibiting systematic overconfidence or underconfidence. We investigate whether humans can learn to mentally recalibrate AI confidence signals through repeated experience. In a behavioral experiment (N = 200), participants predicted the AI's correctness across four AI calibration conditions: standard, overconfidence, underconfidence, and a counterintuitive "reverse confidence" mapping. Results demonstrate robust learning across all conditions, with participants significantly improving their accuracy, discrimination, and calibration alignment over 50 trials. We present a computational model utilizing a linear-in-log-odds (LLO) transformation and a Rescorla-Wagner learning rule to explain these dynamics. The model reveals that humans adapt by updating their baseline trust and confidence sensitivity, using asymmetric learning rates to prioritize the most informative errors. While humans can compensate for monotonic miscalibration, we identify a significant boundary in the reverse confidence scenario, where a substantial proportion of participants struggled to override initial inductive biases. These findings provide a mechanistic account of how humans adapt their trust in AI confidence signals through experience.

Structured extraction of evidence from clinical trial publications underpins systematic reviews and clinical guidelines, yet large language models are adopted for it only hesitantly: their outputs are difficult to verify, their use commonly requires transmitting documents to proprietary services, and they do not improve from the corrections their users make. We present EviSearch, a multi-agent system that addresses these three obstacles. Three tool-augmented agents with complementary access to a publication extract every column of an evidence table, and a value is admitted only after an attribution verifier has read it on its cited page, so that every value carries a page-level attribution. Disagreement between independent agents directs human review to the cells most likely to be wrong, and reviewer feedback refines the schema definitions and a curation knowledge base without updating model parameters. The agentic system runs entirely offline on open-weight models. On a clinician-annotated benchmark of randomized-trial publications, EviSearch attributes 100.0% of its values, reaches 91.70% accuracy autonomously, and reaches 95.22% after review of 15.6% of cells, exceeding random review of the strongest single agent at equal effort by 1.75 points.